Alain Vigneault’s internal clock is ticking as the Rangers prepare to meet the Penguins at the Garden on Wednesday night.

“At this time, I’ve given myself the latitude, without sharing it with you, of a certain number of games to sort out here what I have,” the coach said following Tuesday’s practice. “I’ve only been to Hartford once, but I’ve talked [to management] on a regular basis to find out what would be the other options.”

This will be Game 15 for the Rangers, who are 6-8 and yet to distinguish themselves in any meaningful way. They have for the most part beaten clubs on their approximate level while losing to teams that seem a step up in class. The 11-4 Penguins would appear to belong to that latter group.

Vigneault’s comment was made in direct response to a question about J.T. Miller’s spot on the team, the 20-year-old having been a healthy scratch for Monday’s 2-1 defeat to the Ducks following a difficult night on Saturday against Carolina.

But the coach added the evaluation process applies to “the whole group.”

“It’s like Kreids, starting where he did, then getting an opportunity and jumping on the opportunity,” Vigneault said about Chris Kreider, who has grabbed onto a top-six forward spot since his Oct. 20 recall from the AHL and has refused to let go. “I’m really not making that decision; they’re making it for me by how they’re playing.”

The Rangers have scored two goals or fewer in nine of their 14 games and have scored only 13 goals all year playing five-on-five. Vigneault decried the lack of offense created by the defense in the defeat to Anaheim, which was odd considering the back line generated 11 shots on 24 attempts, but the fact is the coach is going to have to identify his top six forwards and get them top-six ice time, even if that means moving Brad Richards back to the wing.

The problem is without Rick Nash — and yes, it’s indisputably true, the Rangers are not unique in losing one of their best players for an extended period — the Blueshirts don’t have enough depth on the wing to accommodate three centers who have to play in offensive roles in order to be effective.

At the moment, Richards and Derek Stepan are at the top of the pecking order while Derick Brassard is the odd man out, dropped to the fourth line in Tuesday’s practice following a pair of games on the third line.

Brassard, who has only two goals and four assists, hasn’t exactly picked up where he left off last season when he recorded five goals and six assists in 13 matches and starred in the opening round of the playoffs against Washington after coming to the Rangers at the trade deadline. That’s on him, but it’s up to Vigneault to find the slot that most complements the 26-year-old’s skill-set.

“So far he has shown a little bit of inconsistency in his overall play,” Vigneault said. “At some moments you can see signs of his top-end skill and some other moments you see signs of top-end skill not executing the way it’s supposed to, like the first [Anaheim] goal [Tuesday] night.

“We need to get his game in order at both ends,” the coach said, after detailing Brassard’s blunders that allowed the Ducks to score. “If we do that, he’s a good skill player that in my estimation brings a lot to the table.”

Brassard acknowledged that he has been “looking for consistency.”

“The offense really hasn’t been there the last five or six games,” said No. 16. “I’m focusing on the little things, trying to win battles and playing with confidence.

“I’m at my best when I have the puck and can make plays. I have to be confident and patient,” he said. “I’m not OK with just being average on the ice. When we lose and I don’t produce, I take it personally because I think I could help make a difference.

“I put a lot of pressure on myself.”

The Rangers have decisions ahead as Vigneault sorts this out. There’s a decision regarding whether Miller is best served in New York in a support role or in Hartford as a leading man. There’s a decision about how best to deploy the talent, including Brassard.

What's Your Take?

Does earning playing time go for Taylor Pyatt also? He has done absolutely nothing since he has been here. It looks like Kreider would still be in Hartford if Nash didn't get hurt. Now he has been the Rangers best player.

The fact that Glen Sather brought Nash to NY with his past concussion issues after the Lindros fiasco and more recently the Clowe drama should once and for all earn this cancer a one way ticket out of town. What did this absolute f*cking idiot expect??????????????????No worries, Larry. Not expecting you to do your job or anything. Just another fluff piece like this one.

It's no secret, we were not built to seriously withstand the loss of Nash, especially our scoring depth. We were steadily putting the pieces together. We were not truly complete with Nash, we still had a way to go but we were on the right track. A healthy full season with Nash, Richards playing at a high level, a young guy steps up, other guys steadily improve, and then a good acquisition-upgrade and we'd be well on our way. So yeah we were very vulnerable but that's because we were still incomplete.

I'm staying positive and focusing on getting back on that path, which starts with my best wishes for Nash to get better and put this behind him. Realistically, without Nash another upgrade acquisition only gets us at where we were last year, if even that.

Do we really have enough pieces to pull a big trade off? Do we compromise and go top heavy losing even more depth in return for 2 really good lines? 2 really good lines would probably mean L/R winger upgrades or possibly a winger and a defenseman.

Can anybody suggest real possibilities for us? Can anyone name names? Who can we offer and who is out there that is in a situation where that team is looking to shake things up? We certainly can't be the "Buffalo" in the Islander-Buffalo trade. We really can't be the Islanders either. We're going to have to compromise in some area and/or we're going to have to take some kind of risk player. We'd probably have to move multiple players and get less players in return.

Risk does not have to fall entirely on a new player, we may get a solid player but as a result we may have to increase the role of a player we already have. We just have to see it as part of the risk instead of expecting every young player that comes up from Hartford to be a stud. Can you really picture JT with a -20 +/- at the end of this year? I don't believe it. Whether he plays great or not, if we move players and lose depth then part of our gamble is that JT plays a full season, that's through both his good and bad periods and the same goes for who ever is not traded and stays with the team. Otherwise it becomes more like a trade for the sake of trading. We don't need changes of scenery trades we need upgrades, more scoring depth.

We don't have good cap room so it's not as easy as just signing a big name; it's going to happen through a rearrangement; it's going to happen by some players moving. (If we trade at all lol)

Come on guys lets give AV the benefit of the doubt, if he cant cut the mustard maybe around mid season, we will kick his butt out and get Arneil in there. MAYBE ROD GILBERT can handle it. Have a good one!!!!!!!!

@RealFan I could not agree with you more. He is the most consistent player on the team. Consistent at doing absolutely NOTHING night in and night out. Yet he has a guaranteed spot. I'd rather watch a kid like Miller go through the growing pains knowing he is being given a good chance to fulfill his potential. If the argument becomes that they play different roles on the team, then I'm sure there is a guy in Hartford who deserves a shot at playing that role rather than the nothing man. I'm glad Sather didn't hire Messier as coach. Because now he's going to take Sather's job.

@Diane Underhill@The Big Stroonzo They should have and I was only one of a few voices raising that. Typically of the Sather era, hiring 'AV' was a lazy, predictable hire which wasn't going to shake anything up. Messier would have. But what should I expect from a man who has done nothing but waste people's time and money with absolutely no results since the mid 1990's?